Share this story

Iran is preparing for the launch of two small communications satellites, Zafar 1 and Zafar 2, from the Imam Khomeini Space Center in northern Iran.

The country's communication's minister, Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi, confirmed the launch after NPR editor Geoff Brumfiel first reported on the likelihood of the upcoming mission. Iran has even created a website for the satellites, called "Zafar and me," for people to upload messages for the spacecraft to transmit back to Earth.

Further Reading

The satellites will likely launch on the Safir-1 or Safir-2 rocket, which reportedly have capacities of 65kg and 350kg to low-Earth orbit. Combined, the vehicles have a checkered history, with four known successes and four known failures during the last 12 years.

Last August, after a Safir-1 rocket accident on the launch pad, US President Donald Trump posted a photo of the space center revealing damage done to the facility by the explosion. The release was notable because the president shared a photo from the secretive National Reconnaissance Office, which maintains a fleet of high-value Earth observation satellites and whose capabilities are not entirely known outside of classified circles.

The United States of America was not involved in the catastrophic accident during final launch preparations for the Safir SLV Launch at Semnan Launch Site One in Iran. I wish Iran best wishes and good luck in determining what happened at Site One. pic.twitter.com/z0iDj2L0Y3

The United States and Iran have clashed over the nation's rocket program. American officials contend the program is part of an effort to develop ballistic missiles that can deliver nuclear weapons to distant foreign targets. The Iranian government says its space program serves peaceful purposes.

According to The New York Times, the Central Intelligence Agency has conducted a sabotage program since the George W. Bush administration to slip faulty parts and materials into Iran's aerospace supply chains. This program received new resources under the Trump administration. This report added some additional intrigue to Trump's tweet in August, when he shared the photo and said the United States was not involved in the "catastrophic accident."

Iran is run by some pretty bad people, but it's not an out-and-out rogue state in the manner of North Korea. I feel like I'm on somewhat dubious ethical ground to try to deny them access to space. Very solid realpolitik ground, but dubious ethical ground.

Nations that want to develop technology will always succeed if they want it badly enough and dedicate sufficient resources. Truly effective non-proliferation requires that they not want it, that their leadership's calculus ends up saying "on balance, it's better for us to not have nukes/ICBMs/whatever".

How hard is it to launch a deorbit stage? a small sat that reaches this decommissioned trash, attaches to it, and pushes the trash out of orbit?

Reaching, and pushing appear to be easy parts, i'm guessing that attaching to something that has been in orbit for 50 years is the really hard part?

Can we wrap the sat in Kevlar and gently drag it out of orbit with some ion thrusters?

It's been looked at. See, for example, this recent ESA study. One problem is that you need cleanup satellites in a lot of different orbits, since you have to slowly and gently approach whatever piece of trash you want to grab. Gets expensive.

NASA at one time had funding for developing a laser broom but it was cut. The issue is that space junk isn't that big a problem. It is a potential future big problem and future big problems rarely get funding until they are a present day big problem.

How hard is it to launch a deorbit stage? a small sat that reaches this decommissioned trash, attaches to it, and pushes the trash out of orbit?

Reaching, and pushing appear to be easy parts, i'm guessing that attaching to something that has been in orbit for 50 years is the really hard part?

Can we wrap the sat in Kevlar and gently drag it out of orbit with some ion thrusters?

It's been looked at. See, for example, this recent ESA study. One problem is that you need cleanup satellites in a lot of different orbits, since you have to slowly and gently approach whatever piece of trash you want to grab. Gets expensive.

There are a number of programs/projects (including DARPA) that are addressing this issue. It comes down to who wants to fund the final product and implementation of it. There are some legal issues-such as ownership of the sats- and military issues as well.

I agree with you Sarty, but I feel at this point it should be shot down if possible. If for no other reason than attacking the embassy. As a rogue nation you should not be allowed access to space. Presently we still have a polite working relationship with all nations that have access and I don't want that to change. I think most players in space at this point have some semblance of getting along with others. Iran would just throw sand.

Who decides who has access to space, who decides who is a rogue nation.

What if tomorrow China decided the US was a rogue nation and would fire upon any rocket system launched by the US would you still be in favor of your dangerous precedent?

How hard is it to launch a deorbit stage? a small sat that reaches this decommissioned trash, attaches to it, and pushes the trash out of orbit?

Reaching, and pushing appear to be easy parts, i'm guessing that attaching to something that has been in orbit for 50 years is the really hard part?

Can we wrap the sat in Kevlar and gently drag it out of orbit with some ion thrusters?

It is a pretty low TRL but it isn't an unsolvable problem. The major issue is the high cost for low reward and who pays and how do you make them pay.

A laser broom should be more economical in terms of removing junk from orbit. One laser dozens if not hundreds of pieces of junk removed each year. Still even it runs into the question of who pays. Nations generally don't because well that would be seen as an act of war and could be mistaken as a nuclear first strike move.

I agree with you Sarty, but I feel at this point it should be shot down if possible. If for no other reason than attacking the embassy. As a rogue nation you should not be allowed access to space. Presently we still have a polite working relationship with all nations that have access and I don't want that to change. I think most players in space at this point have some semblance of getting along with others. Iran would just throw sand.

Who decides who has access to space, who decides who is a rogue nation.

What is tomorrow China decided the US was a rogue nation and would fire upon any rocket system launched by the US would you still be in favor of your dangerous precedent?

You could say the same thing about nukes, but that would also be dumb.

I agree with you Sarty, but I feel at this point it should be shot down if possible. If for no other reason than attacking the embassy. As a rogue nation you should not be allowed access to space. Presently we still have a polite working relationship with all nations that have access and I don't want that to change. I think most players in space at this point have some semblance of getting along with others. Iran would just throw sand.

The danger of such a move escalating into a shooting war far outweighs the danger this launch will entail. I'm glad you aren't in a place of command where your idea would be acceptable.

How hard is it to launch a deorbit stage? a small sat that reaches this decommissioned trash, attaches to it, and pushes the trash out of orbit?[....]

I'm almost certain that the real, actual problem is who is paying for it.

This.

In my, admittedly limited, experience it isn't too hard. You either include the correct sized docking collar, or if you failed to put one on the sat in the VAB, you just need to include a docking harpoon on your deorbit spacecraft to grab on to it.

/s

One interesting aspect of SpaceX pushing down launch costs is it might get to the point where it isn't cost prohibitive to do something exactly like what was suggested, launching a spacecraft to rendezvous and deorbit a dead satellite.

As for who pays for it, at least if we reach the stage in our development as a species in to space, I'd say whomever launched it. Everyone has to pay a certain amount in to an international fund that takes care of space garage on every launch. You pay less dependent upon the risks of leaving space debris in useful orbits or where it might interact with things in useful orbits, but everyone has to pay in as insurance.

Then the international organization pays for/handles to removal if "oppsie" happens.

Could charter an international corporation to do the work. Technora corporation has a nice ring to it...

Ignoring how much I want Planetes in real life, I am sort of serious about that proposal some day. Don't leave it on the government or a *shrug* no one is responsible attitude. And don't let companies (or individuals) shirk like we generally do with mine operators hiding behind shells, draining the company in to bankruptcy and then the government has to step in and clean up the super fund site (if they do at all).

Make them accountable through up front funding of future removal and/or plans to keep it from needing to happen (with small payments in case opps).

I continue to be skeptical that the US is successfully sabotaging the Iranian space launch program or its ballistic missile program. Their ballistic missile tests continue to be successful despite their difficulties with space launch and the space launch failures are mostly of components with little military value built by civilian organizations.

I agree with you Sarty, but I feel at this point it should be shot down if possible. If for no other reason than attacking the embassy. As a rogue nation you should not be allowed access to space. Presently we still have a polite working relationship with all nations that have access and I don't want that to change. I think most players in space at this point have some semblance of getting along with others. Iran would just throw sand.

Who decides who has access to space, who decides who is a rogue nation.

What if tomorrow China decided the US was a rogue nation and would fire upon any rocket system launched by the US would you still be in favor of your dangerous precedent?

Oddly enough there is clear difference between a country that shoots people down in the street for saying maybe it isn't a good idea to shoot down an airliner and publicly hangs people for being gay. I don't give a flying fuck what China thinks. Appeasement is appeasement and saying you don't want to upset another mass murdering dictatorship isn't an excuse to do nothing.

Iran (the govt not so much the people) are a bunch of bad guys but us shooting down a rocket launch wouldn't be worth the destabilizing effect it would have. The best way to bring Iran to the table would be through negotiations like you know that nuclear deal we just stupidly tore up.

We are in absolutely zero danger from Iran putting a tiny sat into orbit (or more likely failing to do so). Certainly not in the direct and immediate danger which would necessitate the huge escalation that would be shooting down their launch vehicle.

I believe that's the Fallacy of Division, wherein you assume that because he's said 15,413 false or misleading things, everything he says must be false or misleading.

Yeah, you're right, Spock. But he is a lying piece of shit (metaphor), and I don't trust a word he says; therefore, it is my (inductively concluded) belief that he is lying.

What Trump says is bullshit. It's not lies or truth, it's whatever pops into his head at the time. He's a narcissist with incipient dementia. I doubt he knows what the truth is and he certainly doesn't care either way.

So when Israel an Saudi Arabia launch a joint attack because they don't think that Iran should have the ability to dump 300kgs of nerve gas on them with no warning what are you going to do. Attack them?

Why should the Saudis or Israelis give a flying crap about whether Iran possesses orbital launch capability when Iran already possesses the capability to drop 300kg of whatever on their heads? Europe might care, Russia might care, we might care, but the middle east is already pre-destabilized in this context.

I agree with you Sarty, but I feel at this point it should be shot down if possible. If for no other reason than attacking the embassy. As a rogue nation you should not be allowed access to space. Presently we still have a polite working relationship with all nations that have access and I don't want that to change. I think most players in space at this point have some semblance of getting along with others. Iran would just throw sand.

Shooting it down would illustrate precisely why small nations need nukes or equivalent in a world where the US no longer respects the rules of the road and is updating gunboat diplomacy to drone strike diplomacy.

If the only way to ensure respect for territorial sovereignty over the US’ asserted right to conduct drone strikes wherever and whenever they choose if they think the casualties will include someone they’ve designated a ‘bad guy’ is to posses a nuclear deterrent or equivalent then, in the long term, that’s what nations will develop.

It’s either that or mutual defence treaties with China (Russia has ‘been there; done that’), but I doubt the Chinese are interested in that distraction. They’re not the Soviet Union. Their leadership aren’t a bunch of traumatised alcoholics promoted specifically because they were incompetent, thus no threat to Stalin, having no idea what they’re doing so prepared to almost start WW3 over strategic irrelevancies like Cuba.

The Chinese have got a Solar System they want to get on with colonising.

So, on a fifty year timeframe and assuming no extraordinary supervening events, nuclear proliferation it will be. A couple of countries going for nukes can be coped with. Once it’s 20 or more the NPT is dead.

I agree with you Sarty, but I feel at this point it should be shot down if possible. If for no other reason than attacking the embassy. As a rogue nation you should not be allowed access to space. Presently we still have a polite working relationship with all nations that have access and I don't want that to change. I think most players in space at this point have some semblance of getting along with others. Iran would just throw sand.

Who decides who has access to space, who decides who is a rogue nation.

What if tomorrow China decided the US was a rogue nation and would fire upon any rocket system launched by the US would you still be in favor of your dangerous precedent?

Oddly enough there is clear difference between a country that shoots people down in the street for saying maybe it isn't a good idea to shoot down an airliner and publicly hangs people for being gay. I don't give a flying fuck what China thinks. Appeasement is appeasement and saying you don't want to upset another mass murdering dictatorship isn't an excuse to do nothing.

The thing that most impresses me about those who insist that the U.S. be the world's policemen, is that they have 0 chance to face the risks that wearing the badge entails. I assume that you're ready to enlist. There are odious regimes all over the world, including some much worse than Iran or China. If we start blowing up assets of a foreign power, be prepared when they-and they will-shoot back.

I believe that's the Fallacy of Division, wherein you assume that because he's said 15,413 false or misleading things, everything he says must be false or misleading.

Yeah, you're right, Spock. But he is a lying piece of shit (metaphor), and I don't trust a word he says; therefore, it is my (inductively concluded) belief that he is lying.

What Trump says is bullshit. It's not lies or truth, it's whatever pops into his head at the time. He's a narcissist with incipient dementia. I doubt he knows what the truth is and he certainly doesn't care either way.

Agreed.

He's also a sociopath.

“Psychopath; sociopath; antisocial personality; antisocial, n. The term 'psychopath' is no longer common in clinical use among psychiatrists and psychologists because of the word’s pejorative associations. The disparaging clipped form psycho undoubtedly contributed to the need for a shifting of vocabulary. Instead, 'sociopath' or 'antisocial personality'—and the corresponding terms 'sociopathy'…and 'antisocial personality disorder'—are now the generally accepted nomenclature among specialists. Not all sociopaths commit heinous crimes; indeed, many enter the professions and make a steady living (though not a good life). A sociopath is essentially someone who (1) is a pathological liar and misleader; (2) has a minimal investment in moral values; (3) has no conscience—i.e., feels no remorse for harm caused to others; (4) has little regard for others’ rights, safety, and property; (5) is often angry or hostile; (6) exhibits callousness toward others’ feelings; (7) tends to defend shortcomings or failures by going on the offensive against others; (8) tries to manipulate others’ emotions; and (9) tends to act impulsively, without regard for the consequences. See Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual 601 (2006). One study,….”

NASA at one time had funding for developing a laser broom but it was cut. The issue is that space junk isn't that big a problem. It is a potential future big problem and future big problems rarely get funding until they are a present day big problem.

Interesting that the laser broom was named 'Project Orion', as was the nuclear rocket project back in the '60s. If I were working on the current Orion spacecraft, I think I'd be advocating for a name change.

NASA at one time had funding for developing a laser broom but it was cut. The issue is that space junk isn't that big a problem. It is a potential future big problem and future big problems rarely get funding until they are a present day big problem.

Interesting that the laser broom was named 'Project Orion', as was the nuclear rocket project back in the '60s. If I were working on the current Orion spacecraft, I think I'd be advocating for a name change.[/quote] The name 'former and cancelled Orion program' holds a certain panache with me.